Page images
PDF
EPUB

contended for by the Popes and their abet

tors.

"The substance of this oath regarded principally the well known, and at that time almost universally received doctrine among schoolmen, by which the Pope's direct or indirect power over temporalities was maintained together with the right of deposing princes who should happen to come under the public censures of the Church. Every [R.] Catholic is aware that this doctrine forms no article of his faith; it was as has been already stated, a mere question in the schools: at this day it is exploded."(Ec. Hist. ii., p. 166.)

How far the Church of Rome or her doctors of this day are willing or consenting parties to the explosion, we need not here inquire.

Of the proper and

the Church

No. LXXV.

NOTE ON THE EXPRESSION, "CHURCH OF ENGLAND," AS APPLIED
TO THE Church in Ireland.

Not wishing to be misunderstood on what aplegal desig- pears to be a subject of considerable importance, nation for viz. that introduced at pp. 919, seqq. of this in Ireland. work, I have thought it well to append here a few further observations in illustration of the topic.

The 5th Article of the Act of Union between Great Britain and Ireland is to the following effect:

"That the Churches of England and Ireland, as now by law established, be united into one Protestant Episcopal Church, and be called the United Church of England. and Ireland, and that the doctrine, worship, discipline, and government of the said united Church shall be and remain in full force for ever."

be modified

To employ in colloquial usage the complete This legal legal title as here given, styling ourselves con- title, how to tinually, members of the "United Church of in colloquial England and Ireland," would of course be incon- use. venient, and in fact out of the question. "The Church of England" is a very proper and good abbreviation for English people to use in speaking of themselves, and pari ratione the "Church of Ireland" is an equally proper abbreviation for us in Ireland. It may even be proper enough for churchmen of all races in the Colonies of England to speak of themselves as belonging to the Church of England. But as no man in Bristol or Yorkshire, even though his ancestors had come from our side of the water, would think of speaking of himself as a member of the Church of Ireland, so there appears no sufficient ground of necessity, occasion, or advantage, to recommend to persons who are natives of Ireland, (and of Irish ancestry much farther back, in ordinary cases, than they can trace their family history,) that they should commonly style themselves of the Church of England.

The Church in Ireland

not to be re

any differ

In connection with this subject, (although bearing in a somewhat different direction,) there garded as on are some observations of Mr. Stephens, in his ent footing, learned Edition of the Irish Book of Common (as to privi- Prayer, which are worth citing here. In a note on the provisions of the Article of the Act of Union above quoted he remarks as follows:*—

leges, &c.) from that

in England.

Remarks of

Bp. Jebb on the expres Church of

sions,

"Notwithstanding the express language of this Statute, such a mass of ignorance and prejudice prevails on the subject, that it has been urged by English Churchmen, belonging to that class who have hitherto enjoyed, and who, it can scarcely be doubted, still hope to enjoy, the monopoly of high preferments in England, and a large share of those in Ireland, that the Church in the one country stands upon a different footing from that in the other. In the eye of the law they are identical [being, as it were, one family; which does not however make John become Richard, nor Richard John, in the same, nor yet oblige them to wear exactly the same cut of clothing; although entitling them to equally good food, raiment, and other advantages belonging to their position in life.] Thus Bishop Jebb in the House of Lords, 1824, (2 Pract. Theol. 434-437,) justly observed;—

'We have lately heard frequent mention made of the Church of Ireland, and the Church of England. I have myself heard it mentioned in various companies, and I have read the doctrine in several publications, that the Church of England stands on a different footing from the Church of Ireland; and the one Church ought to be "Church of treated differently from the other. Now against this doctrine, and against any conclusion deducible from it,

England," and,

Ireland."

• See the Irish Eccl. Journal for Sepr. 1849, (No. 110,) p. 327.

No. LXXV.]

members of the Church of England.

[ocr errors]

I must solemnly protest. I know not, the law knows not, of any Church of England; I know not, the law knows not, of any Church of Ireland. I know, and the law knows, but of ONE reformed Episcopal Church within this realm-the United Church of England and Ireland. The English portion and the Irish portion, at the period of the Union, were bound together indissolubly and for ever. They are one in doctrine, one in discipline, one in government, one in Worship. Each portion therefore must be treated as the other. I do not indeed say that there may not be circumstantial, modal differences, precisely as there are varieties of arrangement within the English branch itself; as for example the manner of raising and collecting the church revenue in London, may dif fer from the manner of raising and collecting the Church But against any substantial, any revenue in York essential, any vital difference of treatment, I most solemnly protest; and I do not hesitate to declare such a difference morally and constitutionally impossible. I would exhort those who love and venerate our Constitution, both in Church and State, to consider what we have at stake, the integrity of our United Kingdom, and the Protestant faith of this Protestant empire. If one portion of the Church suffer, all must suffer with it. The Church in England, and the Church in Ireland have The Church no separate interests, have no separate being; They must in England stand or fall together. The United Church of England and and in IreIreland is one and indivisible. It was made so by solemn national compact in the Act of Union. This identity constitutes the fundamental article of Union; we might as properly speak of two Houses of Commons, two Houses of Peers, two Sovereigns, two complete legislatures, the one for England, the other for Ireland, as speak of two distinct Churches. The national faith of both countries is pledged equally to maintain one Church, one King, one House of Commons, one House of Lords.

land, one.

Character, and sanc

tion, of their union.

The contin

ued exist

ence of the

If parliament therefore were to subvert or remodel our Church Establishment in Ireland, it would break the Union, and if it break the Union, it will enact its own destruction; it will enact a revolution; and of such a revolution the fruit would be nothing else than anarchy and public ruin.'

"The temporal union" adds Mr. Stephen's, "of the Churches of England and Ireland was the necessary consequence of the Legislative Union of the two kingdoms; and the title of United Church followed as a matter of course. No synodical sanction was requisite to make this title valid; for ecclesiastically considered, it is clear that the Churches had previously been united; being one in doctrine and discipline, and bishops translated from one to the other," a union which would have been much strengthened and cemented, had not only English clergymen been occasionally made Irish bishops, but also Irish clergymen eminent for learning and high character been occasionally made bishops in England. So far however was this from being the case, that for ages prior to the Union, it was the English plan to govern Ireland by a system of exclusion. While the best of Irishmen were deemed unworthy to fill bishoprics or other places of high emolument or dignity in the English Church, Englishmen, frequently far their inferiors, were constantly without scruple promoted to the positions most considerable for income and rank in the Irish establishment, political considerations of no very exalted order exercising a dominant influence, where ecclesiastical circumstances and religious motives ought alone to have weight.

To the bishop's observations above cited, so far as necessarily connected with the object he had immeChurch in diately in view in them, I have no objection; but must regard them on the contrary as both forci

Ireland in

« PreviousContinue »